Blogress Ann Althouse claims that Sotomayor will be the first justice with a four-syllable last name and credits her son for confirming this. But it isn't true. John Althouse Cohen apparently is too young to remember Justice Willis Van Devanter.

47 comments:

Sotomayor immersed herself in Nancy Drew books and spent hours watching Perry Mason on television, and knew she wanted to be a judge by the age of 10 after being inspired by a Perry Mason episode that ended with the camera settling on the robed sage.

"I realized that the judge was the most important player in that room," Sotomayor said in a 1998 interview with The Associated Press.

Well, there you have it. Could this be the 5th reason why it is such a good pick? Even more important than 3 syllables?

Notwithstanding whatever virtues she may possess, someone that “would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life” is exactly the kind of bigot that shouldn't be on the Supreme Court.

I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion [as a judge] than a white male who hasn't lived that life. -- Judge Sonia Sotomayor, from the Bronx, deep in the heart of Latin America, in her Judge Mario G. Olmos Law and Cultural Diversity Lecture at the University of California (Berkeley) School of Law in 2001

Well, Professor, you're probably going to send an FU response to me for writing this, but I've never seen four more trite reasons for picking a particular person for anything than the four you list -- and I don't much like Jeffery Rosen either.

What are your criteria for a good justice, what in her judicial rulings and writings suggests that she would meet those criteria, and, finally, are there counterindications in her rulings and writings that would suggest the contrary

I don't need to check into a blog run by a Con Law professor to find out that the Sonia Sotomayor is a female Hispanic. I'd like to ask the Con Law professor whether she's likely to be any good?

Skyler - I don't think Sotomayor is that liberal - she was originally appointed to the district court by President Bush, Orrin Hatch supported her, her stance on abortion is that the Federal government is free to favor the anti-abortion position over the pro-choice position if it so chooses. What makes her so liberal, other than the fact that Rush Limbaugh told you to think that way?

"she's an outstanding jurist and brilliant legal mind" or "she's obviously the most qualified."

I don't think a most qualified candidate for the Supreme Court exists. There is a top tier of candidates, each with strengths and weaknesses.

I think most -- not all -- recent candidates are outstanding jurists with brilliant legal minds. You wouldn't get to a position of nomination if you were not. But outstanding and brilliant are purely subjective adjectives.

What the Republicans ought to do is select a few of her numerous activist, sexist, racist public statements, quote them, characterize her accordingly, and vote to confirm her.

Their focus should remain on Obama as a divisive, radical, identity politician, whose appointments and conduct continue to reflect his contempt for compromise and a unified, America committed to constitutional rule.

If minority status and diversity are such attributes, why not look for, and nominate a veteran?

I believe there are currently 3 Supreme Court justices with significant military experience. There are no Hispanic justices. There's already "diversity" as far as veterans.

Speaking of veterans on the Supreme Court, those who reacted negatively to Obama's comments on "empathy" might be interested to read Richard Posner's observations (in his new book How Judges Think) about veteran justices' voting patterns. Even though the veterans are a mix of liberal and conservative, they sometimes vote together in divided decisions that affect veterans. (I don't have the book with me, or I'd give the cite.)

Two women - one more than the most endangered species on the SCOTUS (males of the WASP persuasion).

Now we'll have six current/former Catholics (2 Irish, 2 Italian, 1 Af-Am, 1 H), two Jews and one Protestant. Five attended HLS (Ginsburg started there); three YLS; one Columbia LS (Ginsburg finished there). The only justice not to graduate from an Ivy was Stevens (he's Chicago and N'western LS). All of them have spent most or all of their careers in government; not a single entrepreneur in the bunch. Not one of them ever had to make a payroll.

Finally - a court that looks like America! Just the place that any sensible person would want "policy to be made."

2000s blacks, hispanics, and women: "Judge me on the color of my skin and my gender, because being a hispanic or a woman makes me better qualified to be a judge than a white male. And only a bi-racial person can truly be the President of ALL of America."

2000s white liberals: "We'll just temporarily set aside the idea that race and gender don't matter and choose some minorities and women for positions they wouldn't get strictly based on their merits. That will show minorities and women that we are good people. Then they will feel satisfied, and we will all be able to start judging strictly on the basis of qualifications and not these irrelevant racial and gender measures."

2040s blacks and hispanics: "We were slaves for hundreds of years. It's only fair that whites be slaves for at least that long. Besides, it is permitted under sharia, which the Supreme Court has ruled is an 'international body of law' that should be taken into consideration."

2040s white liberals: "This is just temporary. If we let them enslave us for a while it will show good faith and they'll see how sorry we are and then in the future our grandchildren will surely be judged on their character instead of invalid racial and gender characteristics."

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”..turn that around and see how ridiculous and bigoted it sounds:

"I would hope that a white male with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a wise Latina woman who hasn’t lived that life".

Identity politics: on the slippery slope to the death of our republic.

Reason #4 is my favorite. Partisans in both camps are already busy reversing their long-held positions about "affirmative action" judicial appointments. It will be hard for them to hide their two-decade-long vilification or defense of Clarence Thomas but I am sure all will do their best.